Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 29 Mar 2001

Vol. 533 No. 5

Order of Business.

The Taoiseach

The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 22a, motion re. Membership of Joint Committees; No. 48, statements on the European Council, Stockholm; No. 1, Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 2000 [Seanad] – Second Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) No. 22a shall be decided without debate; (2) the proceedings on No. 48, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion after 70 minutes and statements shall be confined to the following members, who shall be called upon in the following sequence, and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the statements of the Taoiseach and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; and (ii) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed ten minutes.

An Ceann Comhairle

There are two proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with item 22a agreed?

Mr. Noonan

No, I still have the difficulty that the Taoiseach is not making time available for motion 128 on the Order Paper. The Fine Gael Party is dissatisfied with the manner in which the Government is handling the appeal in the Jamie Sinnott case. We oppose the Order of Business because of-—

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is opposing now the change in Fine Gael membership of committees.

Mr. Noonan

There are two items, a Cheann Comhairle.

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes. The first item is the one dealing with the change in Fine Gael membership of committees. That is the proposal before the House. Is the proposal for dealing with item 22a agreed? Agreed.

Is the proposal for dealing with item 48 agreed?

Mr. Quinn

The majority of the people in this House, including Fianna Fáil backbenchers, some of whom have had the courage to speak out publicly, are appalled that the Government is pursuing the Sinnott family through the Supreme Court in relation to an award that was granted to them.

An Ceann Comhairle

The motion before the House has nothing to do with this. The proposal concerns the Stockholm summit.

Mr. Quinn

We are being asked, and it is a device with which the Chair is familiar, to accept the Order of Business, including these proposals. The only opportunity we have to voice our opposition is through this method.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is the Leader's question.

Mr. Quinn

No. The Order of Business could have provided for a debate on either motion 128 or 129 and all the courageous backbenchers in Fianna Fáil would have the courage then to come into the House and voice their opposition to the oppression of the Sinnott family and many others in a similar position. Legislation could be brought in to deal with the issues that are being appealed to the Supreme Court. We are opposed to what the Government is doing in this case.

An Ceann Comhairle: It is the duty of the Chair to point out the exact proposal. The proposal is the arrangements for the statements on the European summit in Stockholm.

Mr. Quinn

That is the duty of the Chair, and it is the duty of Opposition parties to exploit every parliamentary device within the system to bring to light cases of oppression that do not have the support of the majority of people in the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the proposal for dealing with item 48 agreed?

Mr. Sargent

Unlike Deputy Quinn I do not have the facilitiy of the Leader's question but I reiterate what he has said about the Sinnott case. On the issue of the European Council debate, given that my colleague, Deputy Gormley, raised the critical issue for both European and Irish interests of the President of America not ratifying the Kyoto protocol, it is ironic that the Green Party does not—

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot discuss that issue now.

Mr. Sargent

—have the opportunity of following through on this issue in the Dáil because of the way the debate is structured. I make that point and ask that it be addressed given the seriousness of the issue which Deputy Gormley raised. The SIPTU dispute does not seem to have figured in the Government's thinking either and it will cause immense disruption. Is the Government concerned about it?

Mr. Noonan

It is seldom I disagree with my colleague, Deputy Quinn, but it seems to me he has given an example of a classic oxymoron this morning where the adjective contradicts the noun because the idea of a courageous Fianna Fáil backbencher is surely an absolute contradiction. We all know the Deputy is trying to back the horse both ways. We are opposing the Order of Business for the reasons I have already stated.

Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with item 48 be agreed to".

Tá

Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Seán.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Séamus.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.

Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John J.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Rourke, Mary. Tá–continued

Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Treacy, Noel.

Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Barnes, Monica.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis J.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas P.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.Burke, Ulick.Connaughton, Paul.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.Deenihan, Jimmy.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Hayes, Brian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Jim.Kenny, Enda.McCormack, Pádraic.

McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Bradford and Stagg.

Question declared carried.

Mr. Noonan

The House will share the feelings of impending crisis expressed by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, on "Morning Ireland" this morning. What additional plans has the Government in place in the event of another case of foot and mouth disease being confirmed in County Louth or any other part of the country? Does the Taoiseach realise there is widespread criticism among farmers in the Cooley Peninsula that they have to rely on the media for information on the future of their livelihoods and, in particular, the future of their herds?

Does he further accept there is discontent among the wider non-farming community in tourism, haulage and other sectors whose businesses are being affected? Are plans prepared which can be put in place if the news is as bad as suggested by the Minister this morning?

Mr. Quinn

In support of Deputy Noonan, will the Taoiseach indicate when the House will be given full details of the new tagging system for sheep? Will that system provide for full and accountable traceability to ensure, in effect, a continuous line from field to fork so consumers can be satisfied of the quality and the origins of the produce they eat?

The Taoiseach

I thank Deputy Noonan for his support. I will deal with the same points the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development mentioned this morning in order to bring the House up to date. We will not have the results of checks on samples from the holding at Piedmont on the Cooley peninsula before tomorrow morning; they were sent to Pirbright Laboratories yesterday. This particular farm is adjacent to the farm of the Rice family. The families are related and the lands are contiguous. The clinical signs are strong but they are different from last week's case. Preliminary results should be available tomorrow morning. A case in this location will not, of course, require an extension of the control zone beyond Louth, so trade would not be affected. All the precautionary measures have been taken and the teams, including staff at the Ballymascanlan centre, are already in place. I would be surprised to hear of any more complaints. The Minister himself has been with the farmers over the last few days and there is a daily briefing at 6 o'clock at Ballymascanlan. The veterinary teams are there.

Yesterday, at our parliamentary party meeting, I heard praise and thanks from my colleagues for the veterinary teams who have been working on the Cooley peninsula. They met with farmers there last Saturday and Sunday until 2 a.m. The veterinary teams continue to work in the area, as are the Garda sections who are dealing with this issue. Of course, I understand the tension and anxiety being felt by people and, at times, decisions will have to be taken quickly. In this case, however, following advice from senior veterinary officials at last Saturday's meeting, the Minister has made it clear that further slaughtering of herds on the Cooley peninsula is under consideration, depending on what happens.

The results of preliminary tests on tissue from Camolin, Laois and Waterford have been negative. Preliminary results from Slaney Meats in Clohamon near Bunclody are expected tomorrow morning. To answer Deputy Noonan, if even one of those locations tested positive it would change the position, but preliminary results would seem to indicate that will not be the case. Hopefully that will prove to be so, although one can never be certain. Detailed arrangements, involving the Army, Garda Síochána, veterinary teams and officials are in place to ring-fence these areas if the case arises. That could happen anywhere in the country, not alone in those areas, but the contingency arrangements are in place. In addition, officials of farming organisations and other people have been briefed on the situation.

Arrangements for tagging have been finalised by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, and he is perhaps best placed to give a briefing on that matter to Opposition spokespersons, as necessary. I am sure he will be glad to do so.

Mr. Quinn

On a point of order, in view of the importance of this matter, would it not be more appropriate for the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development to come into the House at some stage to put the arrangements on the record?

The Taoiseach

As I understand it, the Minister will be dealing with questions later today, so he will be glad to do that.

Mr. Quinn

All right.

Mr. Noonan

We all hope there will be no bad news tomorrow, but are practical plans in place to deal with another outbreak, regardless of where it occurs? Is the Taoiseach aware that, as the person who has taken responsibility for managing the crisis, there is concern that he is not fully appraised of the enormity of the calamity that might occur? It should be taken into account that as late as last Wednesday the Taoiseach was insisting that his party's árd fheis should go ahead, bringing together 4,000 or 5,000 people from all parts of the country.

Mr. D. Ahern

That is nonsense.

Mr. Noonan

It is a fair question. The outbreak occurred the day after.

An Ceann Comhairle

Do you wish to respond, Taoiseach?

Mr. Finucane

We would not have known that if there had not been leaks from the parliamentary party.

The Taoiseach

I did not hold the árd fheis, unlike Deputy Noonan who had a kind of one. The arrangements are all in place, as I have already stated. The farm we are really concerned about is the one adjacent to the Rice farm, well within the 10 km exclusion zone. I assure Deputy Noonan, and the House generally, that I am fully briefed on these issues every morning, as his spokespersons, who have attended these meetings, know well.

Mr. Quinn

Yesterday evening the Government Chief Whip, Deputy Séamus Brennan, changed the position of the Government with respect to the intentions the Taoiseach had to put all the referenda legislation – covering four items, including the Treaty of Nice – through all Stages next week. The intention was that the referenda date would be 31 May, other conditions allowing. That position was changed following protests from all three parties represented at the Whips' meeting. On Tuesday and Wednesday next week, we will only have Second Stage of the legislation dealing with referendum proposals for the Treaty of Nice. Unless otherwise indicated, the intention still is that the vote on this item, perhaps with the other three legal referenda, will take place on 31 May. In view of the fact that Ireland is the only country that intends to have a referendum on the Treaty of Nice – and in view of the fact that it is important not just for Ireland but also for the European Union and, indeed, for the 12 applicant countries, in addition to Turkey which has yet to achieve full applicant status – would the Taoiseach agree that the country needs a comprehensive debate within the strictures of the law as determined by the Supreme Court? It is too soon to rush through legislation and subsequently have a debate on the Treaty of Nice, with a referendum on 31 May. This is a matter of supreme importance not just for the people of Ireland but also for the peoples of Europe. Will the Taoiseach reconsider the Government's commitment to have the referendum on 31 May and allow for a mature and considered debate over the summer months with a referendum date some time in the autumn?

Mr. Noonan

Has the Taoiseach or any of the Ministers who are sponsoring amendments had discussions with the Referendum Commission? Have the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Minister for Foreign Affairs brought forward budgets to Cabinet to indicate the amount of money they believe should be spent by the Referendum Commission to ensure a fair debate and campaign, so that all views are represented?

The Taoiseach

To reply to Deputy Noonan's question first, the sponsoring Ministers have to bring forward a budget for each of the referenda. That is being done under the terms of the Referendum Commission. Those figures have been prepared and the preliminary work has already been completed. The detailed work has to be completed within the coming days and that will be done.

In relation to Deputy Quinn's question, we gave more time to this important matter in the House last autumn than to the other referenda matters. Deputy Quinn was one of the people who sought that. Before we went to Nice I set out a number of comprehensive statements and papers, which Deputy Quinn supported. I was called on to do that and I gladly did so. We put the Government's position to the relevant committees of the House before going to Nice, and we did so afterwards. The Minister for Foreign Affairs spent a long period dealing with the matter in committee. We have already had far more extensive discussions on the Treaty of Nice than on the other referenda matters. I have no problem about having further debate in the House which can be agreed by the Whips. The Bills have to go through both Houses and I would like to deal with the matter before the summer but, as I made clear during the week, that will depend on the foot and mouth situation. If the foot and mouth position makes it impossible to hold the referendum, then we cannot have it and the situation does not arise. If possible, however, I would like to proceed with the referendum.

I informed the Deputy – even though some of his colleagues have since used it against me – on a previous occasion that even if we were to have a political debate, it would be good to put the concept of enlargement to people. However, the advice of the Attorney General and the senior counsel – the latter advised on the Maastricht Treaty and also, possibily, on the Amsterdam Treaty – ran contrary to that. The Nice Treaty document is only one-third the size of the Amsterdam Treaty document. I am not sure how much time we devoted to the debate on the Amsterdam Treaty. The Nice Treaty has generated interest outside the country. For example, the European platform committee, which includes five Tory Euro sceptics on its executive, is already fund raising to try to influence the vote in this country. I do not believe that the Euro sceptics should be allowed to debate this issue during the summer. However, I am firmly in favour of a debate taking place in Ireland.

If it is not possible to hold the referendum on 31 May, the preferred date, it will have to be held later. However, I believe we should proceed to deal with this matter. Ireland is the only country holding a referendum and other states are anxious that we should not unduly delay the process. I do not believe we are doing so. A great deal of discussion and debate has already taken place. If the Whips can agree a timeframe, I am open to considering it. Earlier this morning it was suggested to me that the debate should be held over four days. The debate on the Amsterdam Treaty, which was more complex, wide ranging and significant, did not last that long. If a reasonable timeframe can be agreed, I will not be found wanting in terms of agreeing to it.

Mr. Quinn

The European Parliament has yet to express its view on the merits or demerits of the Treaty of Nice. To the best of my knowledge no other Parliament has formally expressed or concluded its view on the treaty or its ratification. I am subject to correction but I believe member states have until 31 December 2002 to ratify the treaty and there are, therefore, 20 months in which the citizens of this State, not the Members elected to this Assembly, will decide on ratification. While a substantial debate took place on Committee Stage – but not on the floor of this Chamber – the people at large, who will ultimately decide on ratification, have had no real opportunity to debate the treaty because the final legal draft has only recently become available and the White Paper was only launched yesterday.

I am concerned not so much about the amount of time devoted to the debate in the Houses, but about the amount of time that will be given to ordinary citizens outside to have the kind of debate which is warranted. The Taoiseach's desire, contrary to the opinion of many people in Government circles, particularly those with offices on the other side of St. Stephen's Green – to hold the referendum prior to the summer recess is aimed at clearing the decks for the Fianna Fáil Party, if it so chooses – the Progressive Democrats will have no choice in the matter – to create a window of opportunity to hold a general election in the autumn. I ask him to reconsider the position in order to allow the people to hold a proper debate on this matter and the information the Referendum Commission will provide during the summer and to hold the referendum early in the autumn, a full 14 months inside the time limit set down for ratification.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Quinn is correct in respect of one issue, namely, that ratification does not have to be decided upon until December 2002. I could take a similar course of action to that taken by the previous Government – of which the Deputy was a member – in respect of the Amsterdam Treaty, when we were obliged to take up the reins on entering office.

Mr. Quinn

Do not be ridiculous, Taoiseach, we were out of office three days later.

The Taoiseach

The document had been gathering dust for six months when I entered office and was obliged to deal with it.

Mr. Quinn

Do not be ridiculous. The current Government entered office a week afterwards.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please. The Taoiseach is replying.

Mr. Quinn

On a point of order, the Taoiseach has deliberately misled the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not a point of order.

The Taoiseach

I could wait until the end of next year to hold the referendum, but I would rather deal with it in the near future. I love arguments about the amount of effort and work invested in referendum campaigns. I have been involved in a number of those campaigns and it is always interesting to see what happens on the day. We must work hard to try to reach an agreement on this and that is what I am prepared to do.

People cannot have it every way. It was first proposed that the treaty should be debated by a committee of the House; it was then suggested that a referendum should be held in order to give the people an opportunity to debate the matter and, finally, it was put to me that a debate should take place in the Dáil. I will take a fair approach in terms of reaching an agreement on dealing with this important issue. In so far as I can detect, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and the Progressive Democrats are in favour of the treaty. In addition, the Greens throughout Europe, except those in Ireland, are also in favour of it. I hope we can reach agreement on a fair timeframe but I do not believe we should allow the debate to drag on. However, I am conscious of the fact that the foot and mouth outbreak may have an impact.

An Ceann Comhairle

We now come to other questions relevant to the Order of Business.

Ms Fitzgerald

In view of the fact that asylum seekers can no longer avail of legal aid to help them to process their applications, will the Taoiseach clarify the Government's intentions to establish the Human Rights Commission? Due to the way people were appointed to this body, there is a need for amending legislation. Will such legislation be introduced with a degree of urgency or will it be placed on the long finger? The commission has an important role to play in terms of vindicating people's human rights, including those of asylum seekers.

The Taoiseach

The commission is currently operating on an interim basis. However, legislation is necessary and is due to be published shortly.

Mr. Rabbitte

The Irish Independent reports today that Fianna Fáil backbenchers left yesterday's meeting of the parliamentary party in the belief that the Minister of State with responsibility for commerce intends to introduce legislation to deal with the question of overcharging young drivers for insurance. Is such legislation promised?

The Taoiseach

I do not know to what legislation the Deputy is referring.

Mr. Rabbitte

I am trying to establish what legislation the Minister of State referred to yesterday. Does the Government intend to introduce legislation to deal with the question of young drivers being overcharged by insurance companies?

The Taoiseach

Legislation will be introduced, if necessary.

Mr. Rabbitte

Is that consistent with the EU rules?

The Taoiseach

That is among the issues which must be examined.

Mr. Ring

When will the pensions Bill be brought before the Dáil? I raise this matter because of the pension rights of people transferring from the private sector to the public sector.

The Taoiseach

The Bill will be introduced before the summer recess.

Mr. Ring

What plans, if any, does the Taoiseach have to introduce legislation to amend the Ombudsman Act in order to confer greater powers on the Ombudsman to investigate health boards and local authorities? I hope the Ombudsman, whose report brought to our attention irregularities involving nursing home subventions, will be given further powers to investigate the bodies to which I refer.

The Taoiseach

The Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill, which is designed to widen the remit of the Ombudsman and make provision for administrative procedures, is due to be published in the autumn.

Mr. Stagg

Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle will grant me latitude in raising this matter. Difficulties have arisen in the new building, namely, Members are regularly getting stuck in lifts. Quite a number of Members were stuck in lifts yesterday. There is also the fact that the new building is situated further from the House than our previous accommodation. As a result, Members do not arrive in time for the Order of Business. This matter must be addressed.

An Ceann Comhairle

We will arrange to have the situation examined.

Ms O. Mitchell

In view of the fact that the courts have clarified the position regarding the legality of deregulation in the taxi industry, I wish to inquire about the promised legislation or regulation designed to regulate the standards which obtain in the industry generally. When will that be brought forward?

The Taoiseach

I understand that matter is being examined in the Department. I am not sure if it requires legislation but I know it is being examined.

Ms McManus

Will the Taoiseach give a commitment to take Report Stage of the Mental Health Bill before Easter? It has been dragging on for a long time and it is difficult for people to understand why it should take so long to enact.

The Taoiseach

As I understand it, that Bill is still before the committee.

Ms McManus

The committee completed its work some time ago.

The Taoiseach

I will ask the Whips if they can arrange that.

Mr. Naughten

Further to Deputy Rabbitte's question and the debate held at the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party meeting yesterday, could I facilitate the Taoiseach by asking him about the Ombudsman's Bill? Will he allow the Ombudsman to evaluate—

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not a question for the Order of Business.

Mr. Naughten

—the cost of insurance premia for young drivers? That would resolve the debate at the parliamentary party meeting yesterday and the question of costs for young drivers.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy cannot discuss the matter.

Mr. Naughten

When will that Bill be introduced?

The Taoiseach

The new regulatory authority will have a director of consumer affairs.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): On legislation, on her recent official visit to Japan, the Tánaiste said we have a first world economy but a Third World infrastructure, which was a very candid assessment of the position.

An Ceann Comhairle

What the Tánaiste said in Japan is not a matter for the Order of Business, unless she promised some legislation.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): The Chair will find out that it is very relevant in a moment.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy should come to that point.

Mr. Rabbitte

She also said it in Rathcoole.

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney)

They were my offshore comments.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): The comments were widely reported in Rathcoole, Ballyhaunis and places like that.

An Ceann Comhairle

What is the relevant question?

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): I will tell you in a moment, a Cheann Comhairle.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will have to say it now.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): We have before us a list of promised legislation and in the “also rans”, that is section C, a list of important legislation on infrastructure includes the Bord Gáis Éireann Bill, which is not scheduled until late 2002.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is making statements now. Will he ask the question?

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): I am asking a question and if the Chair will wait a second he will get—

An Ceann Comhairle

I have waited many seconds.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): Why has the Bord Gáis Éireann Bill, 2002, been front-loaded? Why has the Communications Regulation Bill not been brought forward? Why has the Electricity Bill, 2002, not been brought forward to this year? Why has the gas interim Bill not been brought forward? Why has the Gas Regulation Bill, 2002, been front-loaded? Why has the rail safety Bill, which is scheduled for late 2002, not been given greater priority? Now do you understand, a Cheann Comhairle?

An Ceann Comhairle

At long last.

The Taoiseach

Without giving a long answer to all the questions, the fact that all that legislation is being brought forward shows the Government is dealing with the issues.

Mr. Quinn

Nonsense.

The Taoiseach

That is why the Government is the first Government to have a Cabinet infrastructure committee and is spending £40 billion on it.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): The long finger.

Mr. Noonan

The Tánaiste should have told the Taoiseach, instead of the Japanese, what was wrong with the infrastructure.

Mr. Crawford

In light of the serious situation where many small farmers are unable to sell livestock, is legislation necessary to allow the Minister for Social, Family and Community Affairs to provide farm assist payments or some other form of social welfare to allow those farm families feed themselves and their stock?

The Taoiseach

The farm assist scheme is already legislated for and those provisions are in place for people to claim.

Mr. Crawford

Under the current provisions, those people cannot get the approval from social welfare officers.